p 

\ a.iO’T  - 

T>aV“prv^3.V 


1 1 L 


reU 


The 

WINNING  PLAN 


SELECTE3D  BY  THE  JURY  0,?F 

THE  AMERICAN 
PEACE  AWARD 


OFFERED  BY  EDWARD  W.  BOK  FOR  “THE 
BEST  PRACTICAL  PLAN  BY  WHICH  THE  UNITED 
STATES.  MAY  COOPERATE  WITH  OTHER 
NATIONS  TO  ACHIEVE  AND  PRESERVE  THE 
PEACE  OF  THE  WORLD” 


IS  HEREBY  SUBMITTED  TO  THE 
VOTE  of  the  AMERICAN  PEOPLE 


Read  the  Plan.  Consider  it.  Vote  on  the 
ballot  inside  the  back  cover  of  the  book. 
Mail  it  promptly 


CONTENTS 

Page 


Preface i 

Statement  of  Jury  of  Award 3 

Statement  of  Policy  Committee 4 

The  Question  to  be  Voted  Upon 
Digest  of  the  Plan 

Full  Text  of  Plan,  Number  1469 7 


Ballot  and  Return  Envelope  (Enclosures) 


The 

American  Peace  Award 


PREFACE 

WITH  deep  satisfaction  I present  for  the 
consideration  and  vote  of  the  American 
people  the  plan  selected  by  the  Jury  as  entitled 
to  the  American  Peace  Award  under  the  con- 
ditions. 

The  Award  brought  forth  22,165  plans. 
Since  many  of  them  were  the  composite  work 
of  organizations,  universities,  etc.,  a single  plan 
often  represented  the  views  of  hundreds  or 
thousands  of  individuals.  There  were  also 
received  several  hundred  thousand  of  letters 
which,  while  they  did  not  submit  plans,  sug- 
gested in  almost  every  instance  a solution  of 
the  peace  problem. 

The  Jury  had  therefore  before  it  an  index 
of  the  true  feeling  and  judgment  of  hundreds 
of  thousands  of  American  citizens.  The  plans 
came  from  every  group  in  American  life. 
Some  were  obviously  from  life-long  students 
of  history  and  international  law.  Some  were 
from  persons  who  have  studied  little,  but  who 
have  themselves  seen  and  felt  the  horror  of  war 
— or  who  are  even  now  living  out  its  tragedy. 

However  unlike,  they  almost  all  express  or 
imply  the  same  conviction:  That  this  is  the 
time  for  the  nations  of  the  earth  to  admit 
frankly  that  war  is  a crime  and  thus  withdraw 
the  legal  and  moral  sanction  too  long  permitted 
to  it  as  a method  of  settling  international  dis- 
putes. Thousands  of  plans  show  a deep  as- 
piration to  have  the  United  States  take  the  lead 
in  a common  agreement  to  brand  war  in  very 
truth  an  “outlaw.” 

The  plans  show  a realization  that  no  adequate 
defense  against  this  situation  has  thus  far  been 
devised;  and  that  no  international  law  has 
been  developed  to  control  it.  They  point  out 
that  security  of  life  and  property  is  de- 
pendent upon  the  abolition  of  war  and  the 
cessation  of  the  manufacture  of  munitions, 
Through  the  plans  as  a whole  run  these 
dominant  currents: 

That;  if  war  is  honestly  to  be  prevented, 
there  must  be  a right-about-face  on  the  part  of 


I 


the  nations  in  their  attitude  touard  it:  and 
that  by  some  progressive  agreement  the  manu- 
facture and  purchase  of  the  munitions  of  war 
must  be  limited  or  stopped. 

That  while  no  political  mechanism  alone  will 
insure  cooperation  among  the  nations,  there 
must  be  some  machinery  of  cooperation  if  the  will 
to  cooperate  is  to  be  made  effective;  that 
mutual  counsel  among  the  nations  is  the  real 
hope  for  bringing  about  the  disavowal  of  war 
by  the  open  avowal  of  its  real  causes  and  open 
discussion  of  them. 

Finally,  that  there  must  be  some  means  of 
defining,  recording,  interpreting  and  develop- 
ing the  law  of  nations. 

The  Jury  of  Award  unanimously  selected  the 
plan  given  below  as  the  one  which  most  closely 
reflected  several  of  these  currents. 

The  Honorable  Elihu  Root,  chairman  of  the 
Jury  of  Award,  then  prepared  the  following 
forward-looking  statement  indicating  that  the 
mutual  counsel  and  cooperation  among  the 
nations  provided  in  the  selected  plan  may  lead 
to  the  realization  of  another — and  not  the  least 
important — of  the  dominant  desires  of  the 
American  public  as  expressed  in  the  plans; 


“It  is  the  unanimous  hope  of  the  Jury 
that  the  first  fruit  of  the  mutual  counsel 
and  cooperation  among  the  nations  which 
will  result  from  the  adoption  of  the  plan 
selected  will  be  a general  prohibition  of 
the  manufacture  and  sale  of  all  materials 
of  war." 


The  purpose  of  the  American  Peace  Award 
is  thus  fulfilled:  To  reflect  in  a practicable 
plan  the  dominating  national  sentiment  as 
expressed  by  the  large  cross-section  of  the 
American  public  taking  part  in ' the  Award. 

I therefore  commend  the  winning  plan  as 
unanimously  selected  by  the  Jury  of  Award, 
and  Mr.  Root’s  statement  of  the  first  object 
to  be  attained  by  the  counsel  and  cooperation 
provided  in  the  plan,  to  the  interest  and  the 
widest  possible  vote  of  the  American  people. 

EDWARD  W.  BOK. 


January,  1924 


Statement  of  Jury 
of  Award 

The  Jury  of  Award  realizes  that  there  is  no 
one  approach  to  w'orld  peace,  and  that  it  is 
necessary  to  recognize  not  merely  political  but 
also  psychological  and  economic  factors.  The 
only  possible  pathway  to  international  agree- 
ment w'ith  reference  to  these  complicated  and 
difficult  factors  is  through  mutual  counsel  and 
cooperation,  which  the  plan  selected  contem- 
plates. It  is  therefore  the  unanimous  opinion 
of  the  Jury  that  of  the  22,165  plans  submitted. 
Plan  Number  1469  is  “the  best  practicable  plan 
by  which  the  United  States  may  cooperate 
with  other  nations  to  achieve  and  preserve  the 
peace  of  the  world.” 

It  is  the  unanimous  hope  of  the  Jury  that  the 
first  fruit  of  the  mutual  counsel  and  cooperation 
among  the  nations  which  will  result  from  the 
adoption  of  the  plan  selected  will  be  a general 
prohibition  of  the  manufacture  and  sale  of  all 
materials  of  war. 

Elihu  Root,  Chairman 
James  Guthrie  Harbord 
Edward  M.  House 
Ellen  Fitz  Pendleton 
Roscoe  Pound 
William  Allen  White 
Brand  Whitlock 


3 


Statement  of  Policy 
Committee 

THE  QUESTION  TO  BE  VOTED  UPON 

The  substantial  provisions  which  constitute 
plan  Number  1469.  selected  by  the  Jury  of 
Award,  and  upon  which  the  vote  of  the  Ameri- 
can people  is  asked,  are  hereby  submitted  as 
follows; 

I.  ENTER  THE  PERMANENT  COURT 

That  the  United  States  adhere  to  the 
Permanent  Court  of  International  Justice 
for  the  reasons  and  under  the  conditions 
stated  by  Secretary  Hughes  and  President 
Harding  in  February.  1923. 

II.  COOPERATE  WITH  THE  LEAGUE 
OF  NATIONS  WITHOUT  FULL 
MEMBERSHIP  AT  PRESENT 

That,  without  becoming  a member  of 
the  League  of  Nations  as  at  present  con- 
stituted, the  United  States  Government 
should  extend  its  present  cooperation 
with  the  League  and  propose  participation 
in  the  work  of  its  Assembly  and  Council 
under  the  following  conditions  and  reserva- 
tions : 

Safeguarding  of  Monroe  Doctrine 

1 . The  United  States  accepts  the  League 
of  Nations  as  an  instrument  of  mutual 
counsel,  but  it  will  assume  no  obligation  to 
interfere  with  political  questions  of  policy 
or  internal  administration  of  any  foreign 
state. 

In  uniting  its  efforts  with  those  of  other 
States  for  the  preservation  of  peace  and 
the  promotion  of  the  common  welfare,  the 
United  States  insists  upon  the  safeguard- 
ing of  the  Monroe  Doctrine  and  does  not 
abandon  its  traditional  attitude  concern- 
ing American  independence  of  the  Old 
World  and  does  not  consent  to  submit  its 
long-established  policy  concerning  ques- 
tions regarded  by  it  as  purely  American  to 
the  recommendation  or  decision  of  other 
Powers. 


4 


No  Military  or  Economic  Force 

2.  That  the  only  kind  of  compulsion 
which  nations  can  freely  engage  to  apply  to 
each  other  in  the  name  of  Peace  is  that 
which  arises  from  conference,  from  moral 
judgment,  from  full  publicity,  and  from  the 
power  of  public  opinion. 

The  United  States  will  assume  no 
obligations  under  Article  X in  its  present 
form,  or  under  Article  XVI  in  its  present 
form  in  the  Covenant,  or  in  its  amended 
form  as  now  proposed  unless  in  any  par- 
ticular case  Congress  has  authorized  such 
action. 

The  United  States  proposes  that  Arti- 
cles X and  XVI  be  either  dropped  alto- 
gether or  so  amended  and  changed  as  to 
eliminate  any  suggestion  of  a general 
agreement  to  use  coercion  for  obtaining 
conformity  to  the  pledges  of  the  Covenant. 

No  Obligations  Under  Versailles  Treaty 

3.  That  the  United  States  will  accept  no 
responsibilities  under  the  Treaty  of  Ver- 
sailles unless  in  any  particular  case  Con- 
gress has  authorized  such  action. 

League  Open  to  All  Nations 

4.  The  United  States  Government  pro- 
poses that  Article  I of  the  Covenant  be 
construed  and  applied,  or,  if  necessary, 
redrafted,  so  that  admission  to  the  Leagu 
shall  be  assured  to  any  self-governing 
State  that  wishes  to  join  and  that  receives 
the  favorable  vote  of  two-thirds  of  the 
Assembly. 

Devebpment  of  International  Law 

5.  As  a condition  of  its  participation  in 
the  work  and  counsels  of  the  League,  the 
United  States  asks  that  the  Assembly  and 
Council  consent — or  obtain  authority — to 
begin  collaboration  for  the  revision  and 
development  of  international  law,  employ- 
ing for  this  purpose  the  aid  of  a commission 
of  jurists.  This  Commission  would  be 
directed  to  formulate  anew  existing  rules 
of  the  law  of  nations,  to  reconcile  divergent 
opinions,  to  consider  points  hitherto  in- 
adequately provided  for  but  vital  to  the 
maintenance  of  international  justice,  and 


5 


in  general  to  define  the  social  tights  and 
duties  of  States.  The  recommendations 
of  the  Commission  would  be  presented 
from  time  to  time,  in  proper  form  for 
consideration,  to  the  Assembly  as  to  a 
recommending  if  not  a lawmaking  body. 


The  program  set  forth  above  is  hereby  re- 
ferred to  the  vote  of  the  American  people.  A 
ballot  upon  which  voters  may  state  whether  or 
not  they  approve  the  plan  in  substance  will  be 
found  inside  the  back  cover. 


Author’s  Name  Not  to  Be  Revealed  Until 
After  Referendum 

In  order  that  the  vote  may  be  taken  solely 
upon  the  merits  of  the  plan,  the  Policy 
Committee,  with  the  acquiescence  of  Mr.  Bok, 
has  decided  not  to  disclose  the  authorship  of 
the  plan  until  after  the  referendum,  or  early 
in  February.  The  identity  of  the  author  is 
unknown  to  the  members  of  the  Jury  of  Award 
and  the  Policy  Committee,  except  one  delegated 
member. 

The  Policy  Committee 
John  W.  Davis 
Learned  Hand 
William  H.  Johnston 
Esther  Everett  Lape 

Member  in  Charge 
Nathan  L.  Miller 
Mrs.  Gifford  Pinchot 
Mrs.  Ogden  Reid 
Mrs.  Franklin  D.  Roosevelt 
Henry  L.  Stimson 
Melville  E.  Stone 
Mrs.  Frank  A.  Vanderlip 
Cornelius  N.  Bliss,  Jr., 

Treasurer 


6 


Full  Text  of  Plan 

The  complete  manuscript  of  the  author  of 
the  plan.  No.  1469,  including  his  reasoning, 
is  given  below; 

A plan  to  secure  cooperation  be- 
tween the  United  States  and 
other  nations  “to  achieve  and 
preserve  the  peace  of  the  world” 

Five-sixths  of  all  nations,  including  about 
four-fifths  of  mankind,  have  already  created  a 
world  organization,  the  purpose  of  which  is 
“to  promote  international  cooperation  and  to 
achieve  international  peace  and  security.” 

There  Is  Not  Room  for  More  Than  One 
Organization  to  Promote  International 
Cooperation 

Those  nations  cannot  and  will  not  abandon 
this  system,  which  has  now  been  actively  op- 
erating for  three  and  a half  years.  If  leading 
members  of  the  United  States  Government 
ever  had  serious  hopes  that  another  association 
of  nations  could  be  formed,  such  hopes  were 
dispelled  during  the  Washington  Conference  by 
plain  intimations  from  other  Powers  that  there 
is  not  room  for  more  than  one  organization 
like  the  League  of  Nations. 

The  States  outside  the  organized  world 
are  not  of  such  a character  that  the  United 
States  could  hopefully  cooperate  with  them 
for  the  purpose  named. 

Therefore,  the  only  possible  path  to  co- 
operation in  which  the  United  States  can  take 
an  increasing  share  is  that  which  leads  toward 
some  form  of  agreement  with  the  world  as  now 
organized,  called  the  League  of  Nations. 

By  sheer  force  of  social  international  gravi- 
tation such  cooperation  becomes  inevitable. 

The  United  States  Has  Already  Gone  Far 
in  Cooperation  With  the 
League  of  Nations 

The  United  States  Government,  theoretically 
maintaining  a policy  of  isolation,  has  actually 
gone  far,  since  March  4,  1921,  toward  “co- 
operation with  other  nations  to  achieve  and 
preserve  the  peace  of  the  world.” 


7 


The  most  familiar  part  of  the  story  is  the 
work  of  the  Washington  Conference,  wherein 
President  Harding’s  Administration  made  a 
beginning  of  naval  disarmament,  opened  to 
China  a prospect  of  rehabilitation  and  joined 
with  Great  Britain,  Japan  and  France  to  make 
the  Pacific  Ocean  worthy  of  its  name. 

Later  came  the  recommendation  that  the 
United  States  should  adhere  to  the  Permanent 
Court  of  International  Justice. 

Not  long  after  that  action  President  Harding 
wrote  to  Bishop  Gailor; 

“I  do  not  believe  any  man  can  confront  the 
responsibility  of  a President  of  the  United 
States  and  yet  adhere  to  the  idea  that  it  is 
possible  for  our  country  to  maintain  an  attitude 
of  isolation  and  aloofness  in  the  world." 

But  since  the  proposed  adhesion  to  the  Per- 
manent Court  would  bring  this  country  into 
close  contact  at  one  time  and  point  with  the 
League  of  Nations,  and  since  such  action  is 
strenuously  opposed  for  exactly  that  reason, 
it  is  pertinent  to  inquire  not  only  how  much 
cooperation  with  the  League  and  its  organs  has 
been  proposed  during  the  life  of  the  present 
Administration,  but  also  how  much  has  been 
actually  begun. 

Officially  or  Unofficially  the  United  States 
Is  Represented  on  Many  League 
Commissions 

The  United  States  Government  has  accred- 
ited its  representatives  to  sit  as  members  “in 
an  unofficial  and  consulting  capacity”  upon 
four  of  the  most  important  social  welfare  com- 
missions of  the  League,  viz. : Health,  Opium, 
Traffic  in  Women  and  Children,  and  Anthrax 
(Industrial  Hygiene). 

Our  Government  is  a full  member  of  the 
International  Hydrographic  Bureau,  an  organ 
of  the  League.  Our  Government  was  repre- 
sented by  an  “unofficial”  observer  in  the 
Brussels  Conference  (Finance  and  Economic 
Commission)  in  1920.  It  sent  Hon.  Stephen 
G.  Porter  and  Bishop  Brent  to  represent  it  at 
the  meeting  of  the  Opium  Commission  last 
May. 

Our  Public  Health  Service  has  taken  part  in 
the  Serological  Congresses  of  the  Epidemics 
Commission  and  has  helped  in  the  experimental 
work  for  the  standardization  of  serums. 


8 


Our  Government  collaborates  with  the 
League  Health  Organization  through  the  In- 
ternational Office  of  Public  Health  at  Paris, 
and  with  the  Agriculture  Committee  of  the 
League  Labor  Organization  through  the  Inter- 
national Institute  of  Agriculture  at  Rome. 

In  February,  1923,  Secretary  Hughes  and 
President  Harding  formally  recommended  that 
the  Senate  approve  our  adhesion  to  the  Per- 
manent Court  under  four  conditions  or  reser- 
vations, one  of  which  was  that  the  United 
States  should  officially  participate  in  the  election 
of  judges  by  the  Assembly  and  Council  of  the 
League,  sitting  as  electoral  colleges  for  that 
purpose. 

Unofficial  cooperation  from  the  United  States 
with  the  work  of  the  League  includes  member- 
ship in  five  of  the  social  welfare  commissions 
or  committees  of  the  League,  in  one  on  eco- 
nomic reconstruction,  and  in  one  (Aaland 
Islands)  which  averted  a war.  American 
women  serve  as  expert  Assessors  upon  the 
Opium  and  Traffic  in  Women  Commissions. 

Two  philanthropic  agencies  in  the  United 
States  have  between  them  pledged  more  than 
$400,000  to  support  either  the  work  of  the 
Epidemics  Commission  or  the  League  inquiry 
into  conditions  of  the  traffic  in  women  and 
children. 

How  Can  Increasing  Cooperation  Between 

the  United  States  and  the  Organized 
World  Be  Secured? 

The  United  States  being  already  so  far 
committed  to  united  counsels  with  League 
agencies  for  the  common  social  welfare,  all  of 
which  have  some  bearing  upon  the  preserva- 
tion of  world  peace,  the  question  before  us 
may  take  this  form : 

How  can  increasing  cooperation  between  the 
United  States  and  the  organized  world  for  the 
promotion  of  peace  and  security  be  assured, 
in  forms  acceptable  to  the  people  of  the  United 
States  and  hopefully  practicable? 

The  United  States  Can  Extend  Its  Present 
Cooperation  With  the  League’s 
Social  Welfare  Activities 

Without  any  change  in  its  present  policy, 
already  described,  the  United  States  Govern- 
ment could,  first,  show  its  willingness  to  co- 
operate similarly  with  the  other  humane  and 


9 


reconstructive  agencies  of  the  League.  To 
four  of  these  agencies  that  Government  has 
already  sent  delegates  with  advisory  powers. 
It  could  as  properly  accept  invitations  to 
accredit  members  with  like  powers  to  each 
one  of  the  other  welfare  commissions.  It  has 
already  received  invitations  from  two  of  the 
latter. 

It  is,  secondly,  immediately  practicable  to  ex- 
tend the  same  kind  of  cooperation,  whenever 
asked  to  do  it,  so  as  to  include  participation  in 
the  work  of  the  commissions  and  technical  com- 
mittees of  the  Labor  Organization.  The  record 
shows  that  such -cooperation  is  already  begun. 

The  single  common  purpose  of  all  these 
committees  is  the  collection  and  study  of 
information,  on  which  may  be  based  subse- 
quent recommendations  for  national  legislation. 

All  conventions  and  resolutions,  recom- 
mended by  the  first  three  congresses  of  the 
International  Labor  Organization,  have  already 
been  laid  before  the  Senaie  of  the  United  States 
and,  without  objection,  referred  to  the  appro- 
priate committee.  No  different  procedure 
would  have  been  followed  if  the  United  States 
were  a member  of  the  Labor  Organization  of 
the  League. 

An  Immediate  Step  Is  Adherence  to  the 
Permanent  Court 

An  immediately  practicable  step  is,  thirdly, 
the  Senate’s  approval  of  the  proposal  that  the 
United  States  adh@re  to  the  Permanent  Court  of 
International  Justice  for  the  reasons  and  under 
the  conditions  stated  by  Secretary  Hughes 
and  President  Harding  in  February,  1923. 

These  three  suggestions  for  increasing 
cooperation  with  the  family  of  nations  are  in 
harmony  with  policies  already  adopted  by  our 
Government,  and  in  the  last  case  with  a policy 
so  old  and  well  recognized  that  it  may  now  be 
called  traditional. 

They  do  not  involve  a question  of  member- 
ship in  the  League  of  Nations  as  now  con- 
stituted, but  it  cannot  be  denied  that  they 
lead  to  the  threshold  of  that  question.  Any 
further  step  toward  cooperation  must  confront 
the  problem  of  direct  relations  between  the 
United  States  and  the  Assembly  and  Council 
of  fifty-four  nations  in  the  League.* 

*Fifty-seven  States,  including  Germany,  are  members  of  the 
International  Labor  Organization  of  the  League.  There  are 
aboutj^sixty-five  independent  States  in  the  world. 


lO 


In  Actual  Operation  the  League 
Employs  No  Force 

The  practical  experience  of  the  League 
during  its  first  three  and  a half  years  of  life 
has  not  only  wrought  out,  in  a group  of 
precedents,  the  beginnings  of  what  might  be 
called  the  constitutional  law  of  the  League, 
but  it  has  also  shifted  the  emphasis  in  activi- 
ties of  the  League  and  foreshadowed  important 
modifications  in  its  constitution,  the  Covenant. 

At  its  birth  the  Covenant  of  the  League 
bore,  vaguely  in  Article  X and  more  clearly  in 
Article  XVI,  the  impression  of  a general 
agreement  to  enforce  and  coerce.  Both  of 
those  Articles  suggest  the  action  of  a world 
state  which  never  existed  and  does  not  now 
exist.  How  far  the  present  League  is  actually 
removed  from  functioning  as  such  a State  is 
sufficiently  exhibited  in  its  dealings  with 
Lithuania  and  Poland  over  Vilna  and  their 
common  boundary,  and  with  Greece  and  Italy 
over  Corfu. 

Experience  in  the  last  three  years  has 
demonstrated  probably  insuperable  difficulties 
' in  the  way  of  fulfilling  in  ail  parts  of  the  world 
I the  large  promise  of  Article  X in  respect  to 
: either  its  letter  or  its  spirit.  No  one  now 
! expects  the  League  Council  to  try  to  summon 
armies  and  fleets,  since  it  utterly  failed  to  obtain 
even  an  international  police  force  for  the  Vilna 
district. 

Each  Assembly  of  the  League  has  witnessed 
vigorous  efforts  to  interpret  and  modify 
Article  X.  In  the  Fourth  Assembly  an  at- 
tempt to  adopt  an  interpretation  of  that 
Article  in  essential  agreement  with  the  Sena- 
torial reservation  on  the  same,  subject  in  1920 
was  blocked  only  by  a small  group  of  we-ak 
States  like  Persia  and  Panama,  which  evi- 
dently attributed  to  Article  X a protective 
power  that  it  possesses  only  on  paper. 

Such  States,  in  possible  fear  of  unfriendly 
neighbors,  must  decide  whether  the  preserva- 
tion of  a form  of  words  in  the  Covenant  is 
more  vital  to  their  peace  and  security,  and  to 
the  peace  and  security  of  the  world,  than  the 
presence  of  the  United  States  at  the  council 
table  of  the  family  of  nations. 

As  to  Article  XV I,  the  Council  of  the 
League  created  a Blockade  Commission  which 
worked  for  two  years  to  determine  how  the 
1 1 


“economic  weapon”  of  the  League  could  be 
efficiently  used  and  uniformly  applied.  The 
Q)mmission  failed  to  discover  any  obligatory 
procedure  that  weaker  Powers  would  dare  to 
accept.  It  was  finally  agreed  that  each  State 
must  decide  for  itself  whether  a breach  of  the 
Covenant  has  been  committed. 

The  Second  Assembly  adopted  a radically 
amended  form  of  Article  XVI  from  which  was 
removed  all  reference  to  the  possibility  of 
employing  military  force,  and  in  which  the 
abandonment  of  uniform  obligation  was 
directly  provided  for.  The  British  Govern- 
ment has  since  proposed  to  weaken  the  form 
of  requirement  still  further. 

Articles  X and  XVI,  in  their  original  forms, 
have  therefore  been  practically  condemned  by 
the  principal  organs  of  the  League  and  are 
today  reduced  to  something  like  innocuous 
desuetude.  The  only  kind  of  compulsion  which 
nations  can  freely  engage  to  apply  to  each 
other  in  the  name  of  Peace  is  that  which  arises 
from  conference,  from  moral  judgment,  from 
full  publicity,  and  from  the  power  of  public 
opinion. 

The  Leadership  of  the  United  States  in 
the  New  World  is  Obviously 
Recognized  by  the  League 

Another  significant  development  in  the 
constitutional  practice  of  the  League  is  the 
unwillingness  of  the  League  Council  to  inter- 
vene in  any  American  controversy,  even 
though  all  States  in  the  New  World  except  three 
are  members  of  the  League. 

This  refusal  became  evident  in  the  Panama- 
Costa  Rica  dispute  in  1921  and  in  the  quarrel 
between  Chile,  Peru,  and  Bolivia,  a quarrel 
which  impelled  the  last  two  States  to  absent 
themselves  from  the  Third  Assembly,  wherein 
a Chilean  was  chosen  to  preside. 

Obviously  the  League  intends  to  recognize 
the  leadership  of  the  United  States  in  the  New 
World  precisely  as  the  United  States  claims  it. 
This  is  nothing  less  than  the  observance  of  an 
unwritten  law  limiting  the  powers  and  duties 
of  the  League  Council,  defined  in  Article  XI 
of  the  Covenant,  to  questions  that  seem  to 
threaten  the  peace  of  the  Old  World.  When 
the  United  States  is  willing  to  bring  the  two 
halves  of  the  world  together  for  friendly  con- 
sideration of  common  dangers,  duties  and 


needs,  it  will  be  possible  to  secure,  if  it  is 
desired,  closer  cooperation  between  the  League 
organizations  and  the  Pan  American  Lfnion, 
already  a potential  regional  league.  It  is  con- 
ceivable that  the  family  of  nations  may 
eventually  clearly  define  certain  powers  and 
duties  of  relatively  local  significance  which 
may  be  devolved  upon  local  ■ associations  or 
unions.  But  the  world  of  business  and  finance 
is  already  unified.  The  worlds  of  scientific 
knowledge  and  humane  effort  are  nearly  so. 
Isolation  of  any  kind  is  increasingly  impossible, 
and  world  organization,  already  centralized,  is 
no  more  likely  to  return  to  disconnected  effort 
than  the  United  States  is  likely  to  revert  to  the 
Calhoun  theory  of  States’  Rights  and  Seces- 
sion. 

In  Actual  Operation,  if  Not  in  Original 

Conception,  the  League  Realizes  the 
Principle  and  the  Hopes  of  the 
Hague  Conferences 

The  operation  of  the  League  has  therefore 
evolved  a Council  widely  different  from  the 
body  imagined  by  the  makers  of  the  Covenant. 
It  can  employ  no  force  but  that  of  persuasion 
and  moral  influence.  Its  only  actual  powers 
are  to  confer  and  advise,  to  create  commissions, 
to  exercise  inquisitive,  conciliative  and  arbitral 
functions,  and  to  help  elect  judges  of  the 
Permanent  Court. 

In  other  words  the  force  of  circumstances  is 
gradually  moving  the  League  into  position 
upon  the  foundations  so  well  laid  by  the 
world’s  leaders  between  1899  and  1907  in  the 
great  international  councils  of  that  period. 
The  Assemblies  of  the  League  and  the  Con- 
gresses of  the  International  Labor  Organiza- 
tions are  successors  to  the  Hague  Conferences. 

The  Permanent  Court  has  at  least  begun  to 
realize  the  highest  hope  and  purpose  of  the 
Second  Hague  Conference. 

The  Secretariat  and  the  Labor  Office  have 
Decome  Continuation  Committees  for  the 
administrative  work  of  the  organized  world, 
such  as  the  Hague  Conferences  lacked  resources 
to  create  but  would  have  rejoiced  to  see. 

The  Council,  resolving  loose  and  large 
theories  into  clean-cut  and  modest  practice,  has 
been  gradually  reconciling  the  League,  as  an 
organized  world,  with  the  ideals  of  interna- 
tional interdependence,  temporarily  obscured 


13 


since  1914  by  the  shadows  of  the  Great  War. 

No  one  can  deny  that  the  organs  of  the 
League  have  brought  to  the  service  of  the 
forces  behind  those  ideals  an  efficiency,  scope 
and  variety  of  appeal  that  in  1914  would  have 
seemed  incredible. 

It  is  common  knowledge  that  public  opinion 
and  official  policy  in  the  United  States  have 
for  a long  time,  without  distinction  of  party, 
been  favorable  to  international  conferences  for 
the  common  welfare,  and  to  the  establishment 
of  conciliative,  arbitral  and  judicial  means  for 
settling  international  disputes. 

There  is  no  reason  to  believe  that  the  judg- 
ment and  policy  have  been  changed.  Along 
these  same  lines  the  League  is  now  plainly 
crystallizing,  as  has  been  shown,  and  at  the 
touch  of  the  United  States  the  process  can  be 
expedited. 

In  no  other  way  can  the  organized  world, 
from  which  the  United  States  cannot  be 
economically  and  spiritually  separated,  belt 
the  power  of  public  opinion  to  the  new  ma- 
chinery, devised  for  the  pacific  settlement  of 
controversies  between  nations  and  standing 
always  ready  for  use. 

The  United  States  Should  Participate  in 
the  League’s  Work  Under  Stated 
Conditions 

The  United  States  Government  should  be 
authorized  to  propose  cooperation  with  the 
League  and  participation  in  the  work  of  its 
Assembly  and  Council  under  the  following 
conditions  and  reservations. 

1.  The  United  States  accepts  the  League  of 
Nations  as  an  instrument  of  mutual  counsel, 
but  it  will  assume  no  obligation  to  interfere 
with  political  questions  of  policy  or  internal 
administration  of  any  foreign  State. 

The  United  States  Will  Maintain 
the  Monroe  Do<;trine 

In  uniting  its  efforts  with  those  of  other 
States  for  the  preservation  of  peace  and  the 
promotion  of  the  common  welfare,  the  United 
States  does  not  abandon  its  traditional  attitude 
concerning  American  independence  of  the  Old 
World  and  does  not  consent  to  submit  its  long- 
established  policy  concerning  questions  re- 
garded by  it  as  purely  American  to  the  recom- 
mendation or  decision  of  other  Powers. 


14 


The  United  States  Proposes  That  Moral 
Judgment  and  Public  Opinion  be 
Substituted  for  Force 

II.  The  United  States  will  assume  no  obli- 
gations under  Article  X.  in  its  present  form  in 
the  Covenant,  unless  in  any  particular  case 
Congress  has  authorized  such  action. 

The  United  States  will  assume  no  obli- 
gations under  Article  XVI,  in  its  present  form 
in  the  Covenant  or  in  its  amended  form  as 
now  proposed,  unless  in  any  particular  case 
Congress  has  authorized  such  action. 

The  United  States  proposes  that  Articles 
X and  XVI  be  either  dropped  altogether  or 
so  amended  and  changed  as  to  eliminate 
any  suggestion  of  a general  agreement  to  use 
coercion  for  obtaining  conformity  to  the 
pledges  of  the  Covenant. 

The  United  States  Will  Assume  No 
Obligations  Under  the 
Versailles  Treaty 

III.  The  United  States  Government  will 
accept  no  responsibility  and  assume  no  obliga- 
tion in  connection  "with  any  duties  imposed 
upon  the  League  by  the  peace  treaties, 
unless  in  any  particular  case  Congress  has 
authorized  such  action. 

The  United  States  Proposes  that 
Admission  Be  Assured  to  Any 
Self-Governing  State 

IV.  The  United  States  Government  pro- 
poses that  Article  I of  the  Covenant  be  con- 
strued and  applied,  or,  if  necessary,  redrafted, 
so  that  admission  to  the  League  shall  be 
assured  to  any  self-governing  State  that  wishes 
to  join  and  that  receives  the  favorable  vote  of 
two-thirds  of  the  Assembly. 

The  Continuing  Development  of  Inter- 
national Law  Must  be  Provided  For 

V.  As  a further  condition  ©f  its  participation 
in  the  work  and  counsels  of  the  League,  the 
United  States  asks  that  the  Assembly  and 
Council  consent — or  obtain  authority — to  be- 
gin collaboration  for  the  revision  and  develop- 
ment of  international  law,  employing,  for 
this  purpose,  the  aid  of  a commission  of 
jurists.  This  commission  would  be  directed 


15 


to  formulate  anew  existing  rules  of  the  law  of 
nations,  to  reconcile  divergent  opinions,  to 
consider  points  hitherto  inadequately  provided 
for  but  vital  to  the  maintenance  of  international 
justice,  and  in  general  to  define  the  social 
rights  and  duties  of  States.  The  recommen- 
dations of  the  commission  would  be  presented 
from  time  to  time,  in  proper  form  for  considera- 
tion, to  the  Assembly  as  to  a recommending  if 
not  a lawmaking  body. 

Among  these  conditions  Numbers  I and  II 
have  already  been  discussed.  Number  III  is 
a logical  consequence  of  the  refusal  of  the 
United  States  Senate  to  ratify  the  treaty 
of  Versailles,  and  of  the  settled  policy  of 
the  United  States  which  is  characterized  in 
the  first  reservation.  Concerning  Numbers 
IV  and  V this  may  be  said; 

Anything  less  than  a world  conference, 
especially  when  Great  Powers  are  excluded, 
must  incur,  in  proportion  to  the  exclusions,  the 
suspicion  of  being  an  alliance,  rather  than  a 
family  of  nations.  The  United  States  can 
render  service  in  emphasizing  this  lesson, 
learned  in  the  Hague  Conferences,  and  in  thus 
helping  to  reconstitute  the  family  of  nations 
as  it  really  is.  Such  a conference  or  assembly 
must  obviously  bear  the  chief  responsibility 
for  the  development  of  new  parts  of  the  law 
of  nations,  devised  to  fit  changed  and  changing 
conditions,  to  extend  the  sway  of  justice,  and 
to  help  in  preserving  peace  and  security. 


i6 


THE  AMERICAN  PEACE  AWARD 


342  Madison  Avenue,  New  York  City 


POLICY  COMMITTEE 

JOHN  W.  DAVIS 
LEARNED  HAND 
WILLIAM  H.  JOHNSTON 
ESTHER  EVERETT  LAPE 

Member  in  Charge 
NATHAN  L.  MILLER 
MRS.  GIFFORD  PINCHOT 
MRS.  OGDEN  REID 
MRS.  FRANKLIN  D.  ROOSEVELT 
HENRY  L.  STIMSON 
MELVILLE  STONE 
MRS.  FRANK  A.  VANDERLIP 
CORNELIUS  N.  BLISS,  Jr.,  Treasurer 


JURY  OF  AWARD 

ELIHU  ROOT,  Chairman 
JAMES  GUTHRIE  HARBORD 
EDWARD  M.  HOUSE 
ELLEN  F.  PENDLETON 
ROSCOE  POUND 
WILLIAM  ALLEN  WHITE 
BRAND  WHITLOCK 


WYNKOO»  HALLENBECK  CRAWFORD  CCMf  ANY.  NEW  YORK 


f 


■ \ yi 


i-' 


--^‘  A-*'  ‘ 


